Compensation for failure to tackle problem of pollution (ECHR)
10 February 2011, Strasbourg (applic. 30499/03). The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) awarded compensation to two families who for many years suffered chronic health problems and damage to their homes and living environment as a result of a coal mine and a factory operating nearby.
A State-owned coal mine started operating in 1960 in the vicinity of the applicants’ houses, and a mine spoil heap was erected around 100 metres away from the house of one of the applicant families. In 1979, the State further opened a coal processing factory which subsequently produced a 60-metre spoil heap about 400 metres away from the applicants' families homes. The spoil heap remained State property even after a 2007 decision to privatise the factory.A number of studies by governmental and non-governmental entities found that the operation of the mine and factory had had adverse environmental effects, including flooding, polluted ground water and air and soil subsidence. The reports concluded that people living in the factory’s and mine’s surrounding area were exposed to a higher risk of cancer and respiratory and kidney deseases.
The applicants complained numerous times to the authorities about the damage to their health and houses as a result of the pollution. They submitted, in particular, that they had developed chronic health problems including bronchitis, emphysema and carcinoma. In addition, for years they had irregular and insufficient access to drinking water, which had affected relations and communication in the families. Their houses had suffered as a result of the soil subsidence. They could not relocate as they lacked the resources to buy a new home, and their current houses had lost market value because of the pollution.
Although the authorities considered various ways how to resolve the problem, no effective remedial action was ever taken. Remedial measures were planned, but never implemented. As a result, the applicants had been living permanently in a polluted area unfit for residential housing and their lives had been affected adversely and substantially by the mine and factory operations.
The Court thus found a violation of article 8 of the Convention (right to protection of private and family life) and went on to award non-pecuniary damages. The Court held that pecuniary damages were not due to the applicants as they had continued to live in their houses and had not shown that they had incurred any material loss in connection with their complaint of a violation of their right to private and family life under Article 8. As no complaint was lodged under Article 1 of Protocol 1 (right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions), the Court found no causal link between the violation found and the alleged loss of market value of their houses.
More
Newsflash
Registration is free of charge and gives you access to the WIKI section, where you will find a lot of useful information!




